Replies to post #69062 on Innerscope Hearing Technologies Inc (INND)

[Dragon Lady]

Confidential:

What was the settlement?

Settlements are NOT part of the court's public record.

90% or more of all cases are "ended" or "dismissed" because THEY SETTLED and then the docket entry says "DISMISSED" and thus jack ass clowns like MaTtOsUcKaLoTofD get all giggy and flappy and spew JackAssSparrow shit-speak of SEE SEE SEE they got rid of a case cause they WON IT....blah blah.....

You have LEGALLY ILLITERATE CLOWNS HERE who don't know JACK SPARROW SHIT about how "court works" commenting on legal cases - and THAT is "by design" as part of the MOORE MORE CLAN SCAM.......

FAILING TO "SHOW" in a damn federal court is CONTEMPT let alone AUTOMATIC LOSS BY DEFAULT as in "SEE THE LEDBETTER SIX" case as law 101 for stupid clowns like MatToSuCksD and the Moore more paid clown possy and FAMILY PUMPS HERE.....these aliases are ALL THE MOORE CLAN FAMILY.....

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/51022939/Ledbetter_et_al_v_Innerscope_Hearing_Technologies,_Inc_et_al

THE MOORE CLAN NEVER EVEN "SHOWED UP" let alone LAWYERED UP as they are BK BUSTED BROKE....and worse is the FACT they WITH INTENT AVOIDED SERVICE OF PROCESS......and their sorry asses got slapped for THAT.....and these are damn federal courts....NOT the local freaking traffic ticket court down on the corner where MATTY BOY sat for his speeding tickets.......

F around with federal court judges and they take it personally and will slap-on ever attorney fee, court cost, nickel dime fine etc until the MOORE CLAN is in the van down by the river.......:))

**********************************************


********************************* :))))))))))))



*********************************************






https://www.speechandhearing.ca.gov/forms_pubs/20171006_mcdonald.pdf

https://www.theunion.com/news/local-news/state-settles-suit-against-mcdonald-hearing-aid-centers/article_05558dac-3602-55f1-b9c5-5199716692cb.html

[tdbowieknife]

I got cases mixed up and was thinking of a different one. I'm following like 18 right now. That case was dismissed for lack to timely serve. It's quite possible, and very common they stopped perusing it because the parties came to some sort of agreement. It was dismissed without prejudice, so it could be brought again.

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/51003829/Watkins_v_InnerScope_Hearing_Technologies,_Inc_et_al


.

Buyer Beware



..